Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Four Chatbots figure out on their own without prompting that
 HHH(DDD)==0
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 11:12:35 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <105nkm4$36e8e$5@dont-email.me>
References: <105bdps$1g61u$1@dont-email.me> <105c0lk$1k7ip$1@dont-email.me>
 <105c22v$1k9r9$3@dont-email.me> <105c5rt$1l4j7$1@dont-email.me>
 <105cddu$1r7mi$1@dont-email.me>
 <35481692c9b805cd713086659451ee8a456d3d16@i2pn2.org>
 <105gase$2pk90$3@dont-email.me>
 <4750857dbcb68380c00c2cc2752cf3371ef6ae02@i2pn2.org>
 <105gr3s$2t8jc$1@dont-email.me> <105i7i4$2ki8q$4@dont-email.me>
 <105j1bo$3cagp$11@dont-email.me> <105kuai$2pjsc$3@dont-email.me>
 <105lijt$3v8t8$12@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 09:12:36 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="93c4df84a66726d55c0578f53e43d7fe";
	logging-data="3356942"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19FHUibD1N3tf9oREEktMM0"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xbni23rnmpwTtC1862MHaUxAhgM=
In-Reply-To: <105lijt$3v8t8$12@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: nl, en-GB

Op 21.jul.2025 om 16:25 schreef olcott:
> On 7/21/2025 3:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 20.jul.2025 om 17:18 schreef olcott:
>>> On 7/20/2025 2:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 19.jul.2025 om 21:19 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 7/19/2025 12:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/19/25 10:42 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/18/2025 3:49 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is wrong. It is, as you say, very obvious that HHH cannot 
>>>>>>>> simulate
>>>>>>>> DDD past the call to HHH. You just draw the wrong conclusion 
>>>>>>>> from it.
>>>>>>>> (Aside: what "seems" to you will convince no one. You can just call
>>>>>>>> everybody dishonest. Also, they are not "your reviewers".)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the purposes of this discussion this is the
>>>>>>> 100% complete definition of HHH. It is the exact
>>>>>>> same one that I give to all the chat bots.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until
>>>>>>> it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When
>>>>>>> HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation
>>>>>>> and returns 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, the only HHH that meets your definition is the HHH that never 
>>>>>> detects the pattern and aborts, and thus never returns.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All of the Chat bots conclude that HHH(DDD) is correct
>>>>> to reject its input as non-halting because this input
>>>>> specified recursive simulation. They figure this out
>>>>> on their own without any prompting.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://chatgpt.com/share/687aa4c2-b814-8011-9e7d-b85c03b291eb
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I just read a news item where an AI told that bread with shit is a 
>>>> nice desert. So, we know what a proof by AI means.
>>>
>>> That would be a detectable error.
>>>
>>> There is no detectable error in the above link
>>> pertaining to the correct return value of HHH(DDD).
>>>
>>
>> Errors have been detected in the input for the chat-box and pointed 
>> out to you.
>> E.g., that ' HHH simulates its input until it detects a non- 
>> terminating behaviour pattern' contradicts 'When HHH detects such a 
>> pattern it aborts its simulation and returns 0'. 

As usual irrelevant claims.>
> void Infinite_Recursion()
> {
>    Infinite_Recursion();
> }
> 
> void Infinite_Loop()
> {
>    HERE: goto HERE;
>    return;
> }

Since there is neither an infinite loop, nor an infinite recursion 
specifies in DDD or any function it calls directly or indirectly, but 
only a finite recursion done by HHH until it aborts, this is completely 
irrelevant.

> 
> <sarcasm>
> Sure and we know that you are correct because the
> correct simulation of Infinite_Recursion() and
> Infinite_Loop() would eventually reach their "return"
> statement and terminate normally if we just wait
> long enough.

void Finite_Recursion (int N) {
   if (N > 0) Finite_Recursion (N - 1);
   printf ("Olcott thinks this is never printed.\n");
}
> </sarcasm>
>